(Reprinted in its entirety with permission from Eddie’s Corner, Eddie Rose’s blog.)

In another Supreme Court travesty, the Court ruled earlier this month that, under the guise of “free speech”, a church had the absolute right to picket the funeral service of an American soldier who died in Iraq in 2006. Apparently, these holier-than-thou churchgoers (who call themselves “Christians”) of the Westboro Baptist Church in Topeka, Kansas, felt that the soldier was not entitled to rest in peace, because he may have been “gay”.

What a disgrace! The soldier died defending his country, but because these church hypocrites didn’t approve of his life style, they felt they had the right to desecrate his funeral with their abhorrent and reprehensible propaganda.

What is even more bizarre about the Court’s incomprehensible ruling, the so-called “conservative” Justices on the Court (Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, Kennedy) joined with the so-called “liberal” Justices (Breyer, Ginsberg, Sotomayor, Kagan) to form an 8-1 majority. Only Justice Samuel Alito (a conservative) had the courage and decency to dissent from this horrible Court decision.

Perhaps it’s time to give some serious thought once again to the “i” word—impeachment! This Supreme Court is about as out-of-touch with the Constitution as the Warren Court back in the 60’s. The First Amendment wasn’t drafted to protect inhumanity.

About Eddie Rose

5 Comments

I had been watching this case pretty closely and have mixed emotions. On the one hand I think that we need to be very careful about the First Amendment and making exceptions to this most sacred of rights. Just because I oppose what they are saying doesn’t mean that I oppose their right to say it. On the other hand I have been watching the intentional infliction of emotional distress argument carefully and thought that the Court might find liability on that issue.

While the First Amendment protects your right to speak, it does not say that the speaker will not be held resposible for the content of those words. Someone has the right to gossip about someone, but it what they say is not true that is libel or slander. Someone has the right to say they want to kill someone but the consequence is conspiracy to commit murder. There are lots of examples of circumstances in which you cannot stop someone from speaking but you can hoid them responsible for what they say.

I had hoped that the Court would rule that the Westboro folks were liable for intentionally inflicting emotional distress upon the mourners at the military funeral but they held the traditional and conservative line finding the First Amendment virtually absolute. As someone who normally condemns judicial activism, I find myself vaguely critical of the Court for not being more aggressive in this case.

I guess it proves the point that no matter how heinous the content of your speech, the First Amendment genrally allows you to yell those heinous things at the top of your lungs.

1. Eddie, I don’t think the Westboro dipshits are contending that any of these soldiers are gay. Their twisted argument is that America is too pro-gay, these soldiers fight to defend America, and hence these soldiers are pro-gay and worthy of protesting.

2. There’s a credible theory that this is all just a huge moneymaking scam by a gang of shysters. All of these scumbags are practicing lawyers, and they’ve hit on a surefire way to outrage the maximum number of Americans so that they’ll frequently be assaulted or have their free speech rights otherwise abridged … and always win monetary damages.

3. This Supreme Court is extremely solicitous of free speech and the First Amendment; that was even their justification for the horrendous Citizens United decision. I think they decided right here, you start outlawing these people’s free speech, where do you stop? (I hope everyone realizes that my outrage against the Yorba Linda anti-Muslim protesters didn’t go so far as wanting to make them illegal. They were an embarrassment to Americans – just like Westboro is – and they should be met with counter-protest. And the three elected officials there should be especially shamed.)

4. I see silver linings to the Westboro pricks. For one, they demonstrate the ugliness AND the silliness of homophobia for all to see. For another, they bring people like me and Geoff together in rare agreement. For a third, they sort of present an outer limit to the behavior of right wing Christians – an electric fence they don’t want to get close to – keeping a boundary on their extremism.

I am no supporter of same sex marriage, in fact I’m a fan of Exodus and Love Won Out – and I find Westboro contemptible. However, a ruling against them could be used against others. Act-Up, for example, has done even nastier things than Westboro- like disrupt Masses.